ML20151X847
| ML20151X847 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 08/22/1988 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151X843 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8808260122 | |
| Download: ML20151X847 (2) | |
Text
'
/ga%
o,,
UNITED STATES
[
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
wasmoron. o. c. 20sss
%,...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 79 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO NPF.2 AND AMENDMENT NO. 71 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO NPF-8 ALABAMAPOWERCOMPAE JOSEPH H. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 00CKET NOS. 50-348 ann 30-364 1.0 thTRODUCTION 8y letter dated January 28, 1988, as supplemented May 20, 1988, the Alabama Power Company submitted a request for changes to the Joseph M.
Farley h *: lear Plant, Units 1 and 2. Technical Specifications.
The amendment deletes the Surveillance Specimen Withdrawal Schedule, Table 4.4-5 from the Technical Specifications (TS). Also, a portion of para-graph 4.4.10.1.2 relating to the reactor vessel material irradiation surveillance withdrawal table shall be removed and relocated to the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). The program for surveillance of reactor vessel material would continue to be governed by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix H.
2.0 EVALUATION Technical Specification 3/4.4.1, "Pressure / Temperature Limits," contains a Limiting Condition f or Operation for the Reactor Coolant System (RCS).
Thus, the pressure and temperature changes in the RCS curing heatup and cooldown are limited to be consistent with requirements of the ASME Code.
Section !!!, Appendix G, 10 CFR Part 50. Changes to these limits are necessary since the fracture toughness properties of the ferritic materials in the reactor vessel change as a function of reactor operating lifetime (neutron fluence).
For this reason, a surveillance requirement, specifically TS Section 4.4.10.1.2, exists to require removal and examination of the reactor vessel material irradiation specimens.
The specimen examination would i
be used to determine the changes in material properties in accordance with Appendix H. 10 CFR Part 50.
Tat,le 4.4-5 was the established list of specimens and the schedule for removal for each specimen.
4 The licensee initially proposed to delete TS Section 4.4.10.1.2 in its entirety.
This deletion would have deleted Table 4.4-5 and the require-cent for the removal, examination, and analysis of the test specimens.
Also, the licensee proposed to add the specimen removal schedule to the next FSAR update. This action was completed in FSAR Revision 6. July 8008260122 890822 ADOCK0500g8 DR I
I
t 2
r 1988, Table 5.4-14.
Following discussions with the NRC staff, the licensee revised the earlier proposal by letter dated May 20, 1988, based on our concerns.
We have reviewed the licensee's revised proposal. The proposal will retain the portion of the TS Section 4.4.10.1.2 requiring removal, examination, and determination of changes in material properties required by Appendix H 10 CFR Part 50.
The change is considered acceptable for i
the following reasons:
i 1.
The previously approved surveillance table is now contained in a licensee controlled document, the FSAR.
2.
Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix H, changes to this previously approved schedule would require NRC staff approval.
3.
The TS surveillance requirement is maintained to require removal, examination, and determination of changes in autterial properties pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix H.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These ameridments change the surveillance requirements.
The staff has determined that these amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no sign 1ficant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released off site; and that there is no significant increase in indivi-dual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Coseission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environ-1 mental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission made a proposed determination that this ametidment involves no significant hazards consideration which was publisned in the Federal Register (53 FR 22398) on June 15, 1988, and consulted with the State or Alabama. No public coreents or requests for hearing were received, and the State of Alabama did not have any comments.
The Staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
E. Reeves Dated:
August 22, 1988 L
- - _ - _